Genetic Associations with C-peptide Levels before Type 1 Diabetes Diagnosis in At-Risk Relatives.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine whether the type 1 diabetes genetic risk score-2 (T1D-GRS2) and single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) are associated with C-peptide preservation before type 1 diabetes diagnosis. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of 713 autoantibody-positive participants who developed type 1 diabetes in the TrialNet Pathway to Prevention Study who had T1DExomeChip data. We evaluated the relationships of 16 known SNPs and T1D-GRS2 with area under the curve (AUC) C-peptide levels during oral glucose tolerance tests conducted in the 9 months before diagnosis. RESULTS: Higher T1D-GRS2 was associated with lower C-peptide AUC in the 9 months before diagnosis in univariate (ß=-0.06, P<0.0001) and multivariate (ß=-0.03, P=0.005) analyses. Participants with the JAZF1 rs864745 T allele had lower C-peptide AUC in both univariate (ß=-0.11, P=0.002) and multivariate (ß=-0.06, P=0.018) analyses. CONCLUSIONS: The type 2 diabetes-associated JAZF1 rs864745 T allele and higher T1D-GRS2 are associated with lower C-peptide AUC prior to diagnosis of type 1 diabetes, with implications for the design of prevention trials.

High Prevalence of A-ß+ Ketosis-Prone Diabetes in Children with Type 2 Diabetes and Diabetic Ketoacidosis at Diagnosis: Evidence from the Rare and Atypical Diabetes Network (RADIANT).

Background: A-ß+ ketosis-prone diabetes (KPD) in adults is characterized by presentation with diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA), negative islet autoantibodies, and preserved ß-cell function in persons with a phenotype of obesity-associated type 2 diabetes (T2D). The prevalence of KPD has not been evaluated in children. We investigated children with DKA at "T2D" onset and determined the prevalence and characteristics of pediatric A-ß+ KPD within this cohort. Methods: We reviewed the records of 716 children with T2D at a large academic hospital and compared clinical characteristics of those with and without DKA at onset. In the latter group, we identified patients with A-ß+ KPD using criteria of the Rare and Atypical Diabetes Network (RADIANT) and defined its prevalence and characteristics. Results: Mean age at diagnosis was 13.7 ± 2.4 years: 63% female; 59% Hispanic, 29% African American, 9% non-Hispanic White, and 3% other. Fifty-six (7.8%) presented with DKA at diagnosis and lacked islet autoantibodies. Children presenting with DKA were older and had lower C-peptide and higher glucose concentrations than those without DKA. Twenty-five children with DKA (45%) met RADIANT A-ß+ KPD criteria. They were predominantly male (64%), African American or Hispanic (96%), with substantial C-peptide (1.3 ± 0.7 ng/mL) at presentation with DKA and excellent long-term glycemic control (HbA1c 6.6% ± 1.9% at follow-up (median 1.3 years postdiagnosis)). Conclusions: In children with a clinical phenotype of T2D and DKA at diagnosis, approximately half meet criteria for A-ß+ KPD. They manifest the key characteristics of obesity, preserved ß-cell function, male predominance, and potential to discontinue insulin therapy, similar to adults with A-ß+ KPD.

Early Metabolic Endpoints Identify Persistent Treatment Efficacy in Recent-Onset Type 1 Diabetes Immunotherapy Trials.

OBJECTIVE: Mixed-meal tolerance test-stimulated area under the curve (AUC) C-peptide at 12-24 months represents the primary end point for nearly all intervention trials seeking to preserve ß-cell function in recent-onset type 1 diabetes. We hypothesized that participant benefit might be detected earlier and predict outcomes at 12 months posttherapy. Such findings would support shorter trials to establish initial efficacy. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We examined data from six Type 1 Diabetes TrialNet immunotherapy randomized controlled trials in a post hoc analysis and included additional stimulated metabolic indices beyond C-peptide AUC. We partitioned the analysis into successful and unsuccessful trials and analyzed the data both in the aggregate as well as individually for each trial. RESULTS: Among trials meeting their primary end point, we identified a treatment effect at 3 and 6 months when using C-peptide AUC (P = 0.030 and P < 0.001, respectively) as a dynamic measure (i.e., change from baseline). Importantly, no such difference was seen in the unsuccessful trials. The use of C-peptide AUC as a 6-month dynamic measure not only detected treatment efficacy but also suggested long-term C-peptide preservation (R2 for 12-month C-peptide AUC adjusted for age and baseline value was 0.80, P < 0.001), and this finding supported the concept of smaller trial sizes down to 54 participants. CONCLUSIONS: Early dynamic measures can identify a treatment effect among successful immune therapies in type 1 diabetes trials with good long-term prediction and practical sample size over a 6-month period. While external validation of these findings is required, strong rationale and data exist in support of shortening early-phase clinical trials.

Inaccurate diagnosis of diabetes type in youth: prevalence, characteristics, and implications.

Classifying diabetes at diagnosis is crucial for disease management but increasingly difficult due to overlaps in characteristics between the commonly encountered diabetes types. We evaluated the prevalence and characteristics of youth with diabetes type that was unknown at diagnosis or was revised over time. We studied 2073 youth with new-onset diabetes (median age [IQR] = 11.4 [6.2] years; 50% male; 75% White, 21% Black, 4% other race; overall, 37% Hispanic) and compared youth with unknown versus known diabetes type, per pediatric endocrinologist diagnosis. In a longitudinal subcohort of patients with data for ≥ 3 years post-diabetes diagnosis (n = 1019), we compared youth with steady versus reclassified diabetes type. In the entire cohort, after adjustment for confounders, diabetes type was unknown in 62 youth (3%), associated with older age, negative IA-2 autoantibody, lower C-peptide, and no diabetic ketoacidosis (all, p < 0.05). In the longitudinal subcohort, diabetes type was reclassified in 35 youth (3.4%); this was not statistically associated with any single characteristic. In sum, among racially/ethnically diverse youth with diabetes, 6.4% had inaccurate diabetes classification at diagnosis. Further research is warranted to improve accurate diagnosis of pediatric diabetes type.

Islet autoantibodies as precision diagnostic tools to characterize heterogeneity in type 1 diabetes: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Islet autoantibodies form the foundation for type 1 diabetes (T1D) diagnosis and staging, but heterogeneity exists in T1D development and presentation. We hypothesized that autoantibodies can identify heterogeneity before, at, and after T1D diagnosis, and in response to disease-modifying therapies. METHODS: We systematically reviewed PubMed and EMBASE databases (6/14/2022) assessing 10 years of original research examining relationships between autoantibodies and heterogeneity before, at, after diagnosis, and in response to disease-modifying therapies in individuals at-risk or within 1 year of T1D diagnosis. A critical appraisal checklist tool for cohort studies was modified and used for risk of bias assessment. RESULTS: Here we show that 152 studies that met extraction criteria most commonly characterized heterogeneity before diagnosis (91/152). Autoantibody type/target was most frequently examined, followed by autoantibody number. Recurring themes included correlations of autoantibody number, type, and titers with progression, differing phenotypes based on order of autoantibody seroconversion, and interactions with age and genetics. Only 44% specifically described autoantibody assay standardization program participation. CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence most strongly supports the application of autoantibody features to more precisely define T1D before diagnosis. Our findings support continued use of pre-clinical staging paradigms based on autoantibody number and suggest that additional autoantibody features, particularly in relation to age and genetic risk, could offer more precise stratification. To improve reproducibility and applicability of autoantibody-based precision medicine in T1D, we propose a methods checklist for islet autoantibody-based manuscripts which includes use of precision medicine MeSH terms and participation in autoantibody standardization workshops.

Islet autoantibodies are markers found in the blood when insulin-producing cells in the pancreas become damaged and can be used to predict future development of type 1 diabetes. We evaluated published literature to determine whether characteristics of islet antibodies (type, levels, numbers) could improve prediction and help understand differences in how individuals with type 1 diabetes respond to treatments. We found existing evidence shows that islet autoantibody type and number are most useful to predict disease progression before diagnosis. In addition, the age when islet autoantibodies first appear strongly influences rate of progression. These findings provide important information for patients and care providers on how islet autoantibodies can be used to understand future type 1 diabetes development and to identify individuals who have the potential to benefit from intervention or prevention therapy.

Comparisons of Metabolic Measures to Predict T1D vs. Detect a Preventive Treatment Effect in High-Risk Individuals.

CONTEXT: Metabolic measures are frequently used to predict T1D and to understand effects of disease-modifying therapies. OBJECTIVE: Compare metabolic endpoints for their ability to detect preventive treatment effects and predict T1D. DESIGN: Six-month changes in metabolic endpoints were assessed for: 1) detecting treatment effects by comparing placebo and treatment arms from the randomized controlled teplizumab prevention trial and 2) predicting T1D in the TrialNet Pathway to Prevention natural history study. SETTING: Multicenter clinical trial network. INTERVENTION: 14-day intravenous teplizumab infusion. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: T-values from t tests for detecting a treatment effect were compared to Chi-square values from proportional hazards regression for predicting T1D for each metabolic measure. PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: Participants in the teplizumab prevention trial and participants in the Pathway to Prevention study selected with the same inclusion criteria used for the teplizumab trial were studied. RESULTS: Six-month changes in glucose-based endpoints predicted diabetes better than C-peptide-based endpoints, yet the latter were better at detecting a teplizumab effect. Combined measures of glucose and C-peptide were more balanced than measures of glucose alone or C-peptide alone for predicting diabetes and detecting a teplizumab effect. CONCLUSIONS: The capacity of a metabolic endpoint to detect a treatment effect does not necessarily correspond to its accuracy for predicting T1D. However, combined glucose and C-peptide endpoints appear to be effective for both predicting diabetes and detecting a response to immunotherapy. These findings suggest that combined glucose and C-peptide endpoints should be incorporated into the design of future T1D prevention trials.

Clinical Prediction Models Combining Routine Clinical Measures Have High Accuracy in Identifying Youth-Onset Type 2 Diabetes Defined by Maintained Endogenous Insulin Secretion: The SEARCH for Diabetes in Youth Study.

OBJECTIVE: With high prevalence of obesity and overlapping features between diabetes subtypes, accurately classifying youth-onset diabetes can be challenging. We aimed to develop prediction models that, using characteristics available at diabetes diagnosis, can identify youth who will retain endogenous insulin secretion at levels consistent with type 2 diabetes (T2D). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We studied 2,966 youth with diabetes in the prospective SEARCH for Diabetes in Youth study (diagnosis age ≤19 years) to develop prediction models to identify participants with fasting C-peptide ≥250 pmol/L (≥0.75 ng/mL) after >3 years' (median 74 months) diabetes duration. Models included clinical measures at the baseline visit, at a mean diabetes duration of 11 months (age, BMI, sex, waist circumference, HDL cholesterol), with and without islet autoantibodies (GADA, IA-2A) and a Type 1 Diabetes Genetic Risk Score (T1DGRS). RESULTS: Models using routine clinical measures with or without autoantibodies and T1DGRS were highly accurate in identifying participants with C-peptide ≥0.75 ng/mL (17% of participants; 2.3% and 53% of those with and without positive autoantibodies) (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUCROC] 0.95-0.98). In internal validation, optimism was very low, with excellent calibration (slope 0.995-0.999). Models retained high performance for predicting retained C-peptide in older youth with obesity (AUCROC 0.88-0.96) and in subgroups defined by self-reported race/ethnicity (AUCROC 0.88-0.97), autoantibody status (AUCROC 0.87-0.96), and clinically diagnosed diabetes types (AUCROC 0.81-0.92). CONCLUSIONS: Prediction models combining routine clinical measures at diabetes diagnosis, with or without islet autoantibodies or T1DGRS, can accurately identify youth with diabetes who maintain endogenous insulin secretion in the range associated with T2D.

Diabetes Study of Children of Diverse Ethnicity and Race: Study design.

AIMS: Determining diabetes type in children has become increasingly difficult due to an overlap in typical characteristics between type 1 diabetes (T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D). The Diabetes Study in Children of Diverse Ethnicity and Race (DISCOVER) programme is a National Institutes of Health (NIH)-supported multicenter, prospective, observational study that enrols children and adolescents with non-secondary diabetes. The primary aim of the study was to develop improved models to differentiate between T1D and T2D in diverse youth. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The proposed models will evaluate the utility of three existing T1D genetic risk scores in combination with data on islet autoantibodies and other parameters typically available at the time of diabetes onset. Low non-fasting serum C-peptide (<0.6 nmol/L) between 3 and 10 years after diabetes diagnosis will be considered a biomarker for T1D as it reflects the loss of insulin secretion ability. Participating centres are enrolling youth (<19 years old) either with established diabetes (duration 3-10 years) for a cross-sectional evaluation or with recent onset diabetes (duration 3 weeks-15 months) for the longitudinal observation with annual visits for 3 years. Cross-sectional data will be used to develop models. Longitudinal data will be used to externally validate the best-fitting model. RESULTS: The results are expected to improve the ability to classify diabetes type in a large and growing subset of children who have an unclear form of diabetes at diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Accurate and timely classification of diabetes type will help establish the correct clinical management early in the course of the disease.

Clinical prediction models combining routine clinical measures identify participants with youth-onset diabetes who maintain insulin secretion in the range associated with type 2 diabetes: The SEARCH for Diabetes in Youth Study.

Objective: With the high prevalence of pediatric obesity and overlapping features between diabetes subtypes, accurately classifying youth-onset diabetes can be challenging. We aimed to develop prediction models that, using characteristics available at diabetes diagnosis, can identify youth who will retain endogenous insulin secretion at levels consistent with type 2 diabetes (T2D). Methods: We studied 2,966 youth with diabetes in the prospective SEARCH study (diagnosis age ≤19 years) to develop prediction models to identify participants with fasting c-peptide ≥250 pmol/L (≥0.75ng/ml) after >3 years (median 74 months) of diabetes duration. Models included clinical measures at baseline visit, at a mean diabetes duration of 11 months (age, BMI, sex, waist circumference, HDL-C), with and without islet autoantibodies (GADA, IA-2A) and a Type 1 Diabetes Genetic Risk Score (T1DGRS). Results: Models using routine clinical measures with or without autoantibodies and T1DGRS were highly accurate in identifying participants with c-peptide ≥0.75 ng/ml (17% of participants; 2.3% and 53% of those with and without positive autoantibodies) (area under receiver operator curve [AUCROC] 0.95-0.98). In internal validation, optimism was very low, with excellent calibration (slope=0.995-0.999). Models retained high performance for predicting retained c-peptide in older youth with obesity (AUCROC 0.88-0.96), and in subgroups defined by self-reported race/ethnicity (AUCROC 0.88-0.97), autoantibody status (AUCROC 0.87-0.96), and clinically diagnosed diabetes types (AUCROC 0.81-0.92). Conclusion: Prediction models combining routine clinical measures at diabetes diagnosis, with or without islet autoantibodies or T1DGRS, can accurately identify youth with diabetes who maintain endogenous insulin secretion in the range associated with type 2 diabetes.

Type 1 Diabetes Risk Phenotypes Using Cluster Analysis.

Background: Although statistical models for predicting type 1 diabetes risk have been developed, approaches that reveal clinically meaningful clusters in the at-risk population and allow for non-linear relationships between predictors are lacking. We aimed to identify and characterize clusters of islet autoantibody-positive individuals that share similar characteristics and type 1 diabetes risk. Methods: We tested a novel outcome-guided clustering method in initially non-diabetic autoantibody-positive relatives of individuals with type 1 diabetes, using the TrialNet Pathway to Prevention (PTP) study data (n=1127). The outcome of the analysis was time to type 1 diabetes and variables in the model included demographics, genetics, metabolic factors and islet autoantibodies. An independent dataset (Diabetes Prevention Trial of Type 1 Diabetes, DPT-1 study) (n=704) was used for validation. Findings: The analysis revealed 8 clusters with varying type 1 diabetes risks, categorized into three groups. Group A had three clusters with high glucose levels and high risk. Group B included four clusters with elevated autoantibody titers. Group C had three lower-risk clusters with lower autoantibody titers and glucose levels. Within the groups, the clusters exhibit variations in characteristics such as glucose levels, C-peptide levels, age, and genetic risk. A decision rule for assigning individuals to clusters was developed. The validation dataset confirms that the clusters can identify individuals with similar characteristics. Interpretation: Demographic, metabolic, immunological, and genetic markers can be used to identify clusters of distinctive characteristics and different risks of progression to type 1 diabetes among autoantibody-positive individuals with a family history of type 1 diabetes. The results also revealed the heterogeneity in the population and complex interactions between variables.

Utility and precision evidence of technology in the treatment of type 1 diabetes: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The greatest change in the treatment of people living with type 1 diabetes in the last decade has been the explosion of technology assisting in all aspects of diabetes therapy, from glucose monitoring to insulin delivery and decision making. As such, the aim of our systematic review was to assess the utility of these technologies as well as identify any precision medicine-directed findings to personalize care. METHODS: Screening of 835 peer-reviewed articles was followed by systematic review of 70 of them (focusing on randomized trials and extension studies with ≥50 participants from the past 10 years). RESULTS: We find that novel technologies, ranging from continuous glucose monitoring systems, insulin pumps and decision support tools to the most advanced hybrid closed loop systems, improve important measures like HbA1c, time in range, and glycemic variability, while reducing hypoglycemia risk. Several studies included person-reported outcomes, allowing assessment of the burden or benefit of the technology in the lives of those with type 1 diabetes, demonstrating positive results or, at a minimum, no increase in self-care burden compared with standard care. Important limitations of the trials to date are their small size, the scarcity of pre-planned or powered analyses in sub-populations such as children, racial/ethnic minorities, people with advanced complications, and variations in baseline glycemic levels. In addition, confounders including education with device initiation, concomitant behavioral modifications, and frequent contact with the healthcare team are rarely described in enough detail to assess their impact. CONCLUSIONS: Our review highlights the potential of technology in the treatment of people living with type 1 diabetes and provides suggestions for optimization of outcomes and areas of further study for precision medicine-directed technology use in type 1 diabetes.

In the last decade, there have been significant advances in how technology is used in the treatment of people living with type 1 diabetes. These technologies primarily aim to help manage blood sugar levels. Here, we reviewed research published over the last decade to evaluate the impact of such technologies on type 1 diabetes treatment. We find that various types of novel technologies, such as devices to monitor blood sugar levels continuously or deliver insulin, improve important diabetes-related measures and can reduce the risk of having low blood sugar levels. Importantly, several studies showed a positive impact of technologies on quality of life in people living with diabetes. Our findings highlight the benefits of novel technologies in the treatment of type 1 diabetes and identify areas for further research to optimize and personalize diabetes care.

Disease-modifying therapies and features linked to treatment response in type 1 diabetes prevention: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Type 1 diabetes (T1D) results from immune-mediated destruction of insulin-producing beta cells. Prevention efforts have focused on immune modulation and supporting beta cell health before or around diagnosis; however, heterogeneity in disease progression and therapy response has limited translation to clinical practice, highlighting the need for precision medicine approaches to T1D disease modification. METHODS: To understand the state of knowledge in this area, we performed a systematic review of randomized-controlled trials with ≥50 participants cataloged in PubMed or Embase from the past 25 years testing T1D disease-modifying therapies and/or identifying features linked to treatment response, analyzing bias using a Cochrane-risk-of-bias instrument. RESULTS: We identify and summarize 75 manuscripts, 15 describing 11 prevention trials for individuals with increased risk for T1D, and 60 describing treatments aimed at preventing beta cell loss at disease onset. Seventeen interventions, mostly immunotherapies, show benefit compared to placebo (only two prior to T1D onset). Fifty-seven studies employ precision analyses to assess features linked to treatment response. Age, beta cell function measures, and immune phenotypes are most frequently tested. However, analyses are typically not prespecified, with inconsistent methods of reporting, and tend to report positive findings. CONCLUSIONS: While the quality of prevention and intervention trials is overall high, the low quality of precision analyses makes it difficult to draw meaningful conclusions that inform clinical practice. To facilitate precision medicine approaches to T1D prevention, considerations for future precision studies include the incorporation of uniform outcome measures, reproducible biomarkers, and prespecified, fully powered precision analyses into future trial design.

Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is a condition that results from the destruction of a type of cell in the pancreas that produces the hormone insulin, leading to lifelong dependence on insulin injections. T1D prevention remains a challenging goal, largely due to the immense variability in disease processes and progression. Therapies tested to date in medical research settings (clinical trials) work only in a subset of individuals, highlighting the need for more tailored prevention approaches. We reviewed clinical trials of therapies targeting the disease process in T1D. While the overall quality of trials was high, studies testing individual features affecting responses to treatments were low. This review reveals an important need to carefully plan high-quality analyses of features that affect treatment response in T1D, to ensure that tailored approaches may one day be applied to clinical practice.

Plasma amino acid signatures define types of pediatric diabetes.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Metabolic biomarkers with pathophysiological relevance is lacking in pediatric diabetes. We aimed to identify novel metabolic biomarkers in pediatric type 1 (T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D). We hypothesized that (1) targeted plasma metabolomics, focused on plasma amino acid concentrations, could identify distinctively altered patterns in children with T1D or T2D, and (2) there are specific changes in concentrations of metabolites related to branch chain amino acids (BCAA) and arginine metabolism in children with T2D. METHODS: In a pilot study, we enrolled children with T1D (n = 15) and T2D (n = 13), and healthy controls (n = 15). Fasting plasma amino acid concentrations were measured by ultra-performance liquid chromatography, and compared between the groups after adjustment for confounding factors. RESULTS: The mean age (SD) of participants was 16.4 (0.9) years. There were no group differences in age, gender, race/ethnicity, or 24-h protein intake. Mean BMI percentile was higher in the T2D than the T1D group or controls (p < 0.001). The T2D group had lower arginine, citrulline, glutamine, glycine, phenylalanine, methionine, threonine, asparagine and symmetric dimethylarginine (SDMA) but higher aspartate than controls, after adjusting for BMI percentiles (all p < 0.05). Children with T2D also had lower glycine but higher ornithine, proline, leucine, isoleucine, valine, total BCAA, lysine and tyrosine than those with T1D after adjusting for confounding factors (all p < 0.05). Children with T1D had lower phenylalanine, methionine, threonine, glutamine, tyrosine, asymmetric dimethylarginine (ADMA) and SDMA than controls (all p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Children with T2D and T1D have distinct fasting plasma amino acid signatures that suggest varying pathogenic mechanisms and could serve as biomarkers for these conditions.

Imprecise Diagnosis of Diabetes Type in Youth: Prevalence, Characteristics, and Implications.

Classifying diabetes at diagnosis is crucial for disease management but increasingly difficult due to overlaps in characteristics between the commonly encountered diabetes types. We evaluated the prevalence and characteristics of youth with diabetes type that was unknown at diagnosis or was revised over time. We studied 2073 youth with new-onset diabetes (median age [IQR]=11.4 [6.2] years; 50% male; 75% White, 21% Black, 4% other race; overall, 37% Hispanic) and compared youth with unknown versus known diabetes type, per pediatric endocrinologist diagnosis. In a longitudinal subcohort of patients with data for ≥3 years post-diabetes diagnosis (n=1019), we compared youth with unchanged versus changed diabetes classification. In the entire cohort, after adjustment for confounders, diabetes type was unknown in 62 youth (3%), associated with older age, negative IA-2 autoantibody, lower C-peptide, and no diabetic ketoacidosis (all, p<0.05). In the longitudinal subcohort, diabetes classification changed in 35 youth (3.4%); this was not statistically associated with any single characteristic. Having unknown or revised diabetes type was associated with less continuous glucose monitor use on follow-up (both, p<0.004). In sum, among racially/ethnically diverse youth with diabetes, 6.5% had imprecise diabetes classification at diagnosis. Further research is warranted to improve accurate diagnosis of pediatric diabetes type.

Heterogeneity and endotypes in type 1 diabetes mellitus.

Despite major advances over the past decade, prevention and treatment of type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) remain suboptimal, with large and unexplained variations in individual responses to interventions. The current classification schema for diabetes mellitus does not capture the complexity of this disease or guide clinical management effectively. One of the approaches to achieve the goal of applying precision medicine in diabetes mellitus is to identify endotypes (that is, well-defined subtypes) of the disease each of which has a distinct aetiopathogenesis that might be amenable to specific interventions. Here, we describe epidemiological, clinical, genetic, immunological, histological and metabolic differences within T1DM that, together, suggest heterogeneity in its aetiology and pathogenesis. We then present the emerging endotypes and their impact on T1DM prediction, prevention and treatment.

Type 1 Diabetes Prevention: a systematic review of studies testing disease-modifying therapies and features linked to treatment response.

Background: Type 1 diabetes (T1D) results from immune-mediated destruction of insulin-producing beta cells. Efforts to prevent T1D have focused on modulating immune responses and supporting beta cell health; however, heterogeneity in disease progression and responses to therapies have made these efforts difficult to translate to clinical practice, highlighting the need for precision medicine approaches to T1D prevention. Methods: To understand the current state of knowledge regarding precision approaches to T1D prevention, we performed a systematic review of randomized-controlled trials from the past 25 years testing disease-modifying therapies in T1D and/or identifying features linked to treatment response, analyzing bias using a Cochrane-risk-of-bias instrument. Results: We identified 75 manuscripts, 15 describing 11 prevention trials for individuals with increased risk for T1D, and 60 describing treatments aimed at preventing beta cell loss in individuals at disease onset. Seventeen agents tested, mostly immunotherapies, showed benefit compared to placebo (only two prior to T1D onset). Fifty-seven studies employed precision analyses to assess features linked to treatment response. Age, measures of beta cell function and immune phenotypes were most frequently tested. However, analyses were typically not prespecified, with inconsistent methods reporting, and tended to report positive findings. Conclusions: While the quality of prevention and intervention trials was overall high, low quality of precision analyses made it difficult to draw meaningful conclusions that inform clinical practice. Thus, prespecified precision analyses should be incorporated into the design of future studies and reported in full to facilitate precision medicine approaches to T1D prevention. Plain Language Summary: Type 1 diabetes (T1D) results from the destruction of insulin-producing cells in the pancreas, necessitating lifelong insulin dependence. T1D prevention remains an elusive goal, largely due to immense variability in disease progression. Agents tested to date in clinical trials work in a subset of individuals, highlighting the need for precision medicine approaches to prevention. We systematically reviewed clinical trials of disease-modifying therapy in T1D. While age, measures of beta cell function, and immune phenotypes were most commonly identified as factors that influenced treatment response, the overall quality of these studies was low. This review reveals an important need to proactively design clinical trials with well-defined analyses to ensure that results can be interpreted and applied to clinical practice.

Characteristics of Type 2 Diabetes in Female and Male Youth.

The incidence of type 2 diabetes in children is rising and carries a worse prognosis than in adults. The influence of sex on pediatric type 2 diabetes outcomes has not been well investigated. We studied 715 youth with type 2 diabetes diagnosed at a median age of 13.7 years and compared sex differences in demographic, clinical, and laboratory characteristics within the first year of diagnosis. Females diagnosed with type 2 diabetes were younger and at a higher stage of pubertal development than males, yet presented with lower A1Cs, a lower prevalence of diabetic ketoacidosis, and higher HDL cholesterol levels.